It looks like the colour problems have arisen due to a recompression of the JPEG. The small map on page 1 of this topic has a size of 222213 bytes, while the one at http://maps.conquerclub.com/Classic.S.jpg has a size of 71405 bytes.

ender516 wrote:It looks like the colour problems have arisen due to a recompression of the JPEG. The small map on page 1 of this topic has a size of 222213 bytes, while the one at http://maps.conquerclub.com/Classic.S.jpg has a size of 71405 bytes.

Shame on Lack! Why does he do that? Bad enough he forces the images to be GIF:s or JPG:s, and not PNG:s... but if the images need to be recompressed to 71 kb ... Hey, why bother with the graphics stamp if they're going to be crappified anyway?

I just feel this nesterdude is not expressing his opinions very nicely.

Here's an idea nester, why don't you try making a better map? After you've tried and know how much hard work it is to get a map in play, perhaps you'd learn to respect the work others have put in a bit more and express your opinions in a nicer tone.

I'm not saying you shouldn't be allowed to post your opinions, mind. I'm just saying there's a nicer way of giving feedback, than bashing all over the hard work others have done free of charge just for your (as in, you as a player) enjoyment in mind.

First of all, just because you work hard on something, doesn't mean it's worth the effort. Par example: You slave for hours on a cake and it flops. Are we to commend you for your work? No.

But here the cake did not flop. Majority of CC considers the new classic great, and loves it. You're in the minority having your tantrums. So you don't have to commend the maker for his work, but the way you express your opinion is just not nice.

As well, just because you do this for free, you volunteered for it. If you don't' like criticism, then don't volunteer.

Criticism is one thing. Bashing all over someones' work just because you don't like it is childish. It's like an 8-year old having a tantrum, "I want it now, I want it exactly like this, I don't want it like that!! Waaaah!!!" Usually, by the time those 8-year-olds grow up and become adults, they learn how to put their personal feelings aside when expressing their opinions in a civilized manner.

Then again, your profile doesn't tell your age, so I'm not sure is it fair of me to expect you to behave like an adult?

What I cannot appreciate is joining a Classic Art/Shapes game

I joined a map in which territories were touching, not something I'd look at in an American Airlines magazine.

So if you have been playing shapes games, how is this any different? Except for being visually far superior, of course.

At least read the bloody thread, nesterdude.The original Classic map had borders instead of connectors alright.Then it had to be replaced in a couple of hours' time, so Classic Shapes came to be. For those who wanted a map with some sort of theme, Classic Art was added. Now the plan was to make a new Classic map that actually looked like the world. To avoid copyright issues with Hasbro, CC has opted for points connected by lines, like Classic Shapes. I think they have made a very smart choice there, which will hopefully ensure the existence of CC without legal issues.

I collect that you just hate these connected-dots-style maps, however smart it was to make this one. Yet if you'd be able to set aside that hate, you'd see this is NOT a bad map. It is very well made and beautiful (at least, the non-dimmed version of it - read up in the thread). I hope you're enough of a CC'er to admit that.

Comparing the new map to Shapes is a bit ludicrous. Shapes had direct, not arced lines, starting in the direction of feasible attack; clear differences between the symbols for the various regions rather than merely colorized text to show the difference between regions.

I'd really detest it if the site chose to make all the maps like this, even if I can appreciate the work that went into the map.

If the attempt was to make the map as un-Risk-looking as possible, as I believe it was, then the map succeeded. Unfortunately, for many of us, it's so un-Risk-looking that it's confusing over and above knowing the capital names of the chosen cities. The site has, backhandedly, acknowledged the confusion by allowing those in SoC to somehow see this map with Shapes' overlay (lucky them).

Personally, I don't find the new map "beautiful;" any beauty I could see in the shading of the countries as 'artwork' is gone because of all the distracting arcs. As for gameplay: I dislike not seeing a shape outline for the various regions especially when all the regions use essentially the same colorscheme; and I find it difficult to discern the various regions from just the tiny colorized texts.

stahrgazer wrote:The site has, backhandedly, acknowledged the confusion by allowing those in SoC to somehow see this map with Shapes' overlay (lucky them).

This is the third thread in which I have read this incorrect statement - I'm only responding again in case someone else does not see the correction.

SoC members see the exact same map as everyone else, not Shapes. However in addition to the city names, the letter/number names from shapes are placed on the map. This was done because the SoC has already written strategies using the Shapes names, and they will continue to do so because it is faster and easier for them.

If anything it makes the map more confusing (IMO) since there are two sets of names for each territory. The city names are used in the gamelog for both versions of the map.

saaimen wrote:At least read the bloody thread, nesterdude.The original Classic map had borders instead of connectors alright.Then it had to be replaced in a couple of hours' time, so Classic Shapes came to be. For those who wanted a map with some sort of theme, Classic Art was added. Now the plan was to make a new Classic map that actually looked like the world. To avoid copyright issues with Hasbro, CC has opted for points connected by lines, like Classic Shapes. I think they have made a very smart choice there, which will hopefully ensure the existence of CC without legal issues.

I collect that you just hate these connected-dots-style maps, however smart it was to make this one. Yet if you'd be able to set aside that hate, you'd see this is NOT a bad map. It is very well made and beautiful (at least, the non-dimmed version of it - read up in the thread). I hope you're enough of a CC'er to admit that.

I read the bloody thread pal

If such is the case, then LEAVE THE GAMES THAT PEOPLE JOINED IN THE MAP THE JOINED (e.g. leaving shapes or art and introducing this map as a beta separate map)

I don't like this new map, that's clear.

But I won't join it. I'd like the play my games out on the maps I joined.

nesterdude wrote:If such is the case, then LEAVE THE GAMES THAT PEOPLE JOINED IN THE MAP THE JOINED (e.g. leaving shapes or art and introducing this map as a beta separate map)

I don't like this new map, that's clear.

But I won't join it. I'd like the play my games out on the maps I joined.

That's actually an understandable gripe. I know a that not everyone will like a given map, and one of the problem with revamps are the way they are transitioned. You didn't choose to play using these graphics, and since you just started many games on the old design you feel slighted.

Perhaps in the future there should be a bigger warning before maps are switched in a revamp - maybe after reaching final forge another announcement could have been made to let everyone know it was coming. I don't think there is any way to let the old games finish on the design they started with, but I can see you would prefer that solution to the current system. Anyway, I'm sorry you're not happy with the new design nester and I mean that sincerely.